T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on a nd i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by 9th C i r . R . 36- 3. NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T UN I T E D S T AT E S OF AME R I C A, P l ai nt i ff

- A pp el l ee , v. G A RY W A Y N E RO SS, D e f

e n d a n t - A p p e lla n t. N o. 09- 10010 D . C . N o. 4: 06 -c r- 00 63 7-S B A -1 ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e N o r th e rn D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia S aundr aB . A rm s tr ong, U ni t e d S t a t e s D i s tr i c tJ udge , P r e s i di ng

A r gue d a nd S ubm i tt e d M a y 11, 2010 S a n F r a n c is c o , C a lif

o rn ia B efo re: R E IN H A R D T , W . F L E T C H E R an d N . R . S M IT H , C i rcu i tJu d g es.

G a ry W a y ne R os s appe a l s hi s c onvi c t i on by aj ury f ora tt e m pt e d onl i ne s ol i c i t a t i on of

am i nori n vi ol a t i on of

18 U . S . C . § 2422( b) . H e m a ke s f our a r g u m e n ts , n o n e o f

w h ic h e n title s h im to r e lie f . 

# FI LED MA Y20 2 010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS- 2-

F i r s t , R os s c ont e nds tha tthe r e w a s i ns uf f i c i e nte vi de nc e tha the t ook a

“ s ubs t a nt i a l s t e p” t ow a r ds a tt e m pt i ng t o pe r s ua de , i nduc e , e nt i c e orc oe r c e ape r s on un der 18 year s of a ge t o eng age i n sexual ac t i vi ty thatw ou l d con st i tut e acr i m i nal o f f e n s e . See U

ni ted Stat es v. G oet

zke , 494 F . 3d 1231, 1234- 35 ( 9th C i r . 2007) ; 18 U . S . C . § 2 42 2(b). T o p re vai l on thi s c l ai m , R oss m ustdem on stra t e that“ af t er vi ew i ng the evi dence i n the l i gh tm ostfa vo rabl e t o the prosecut i on , [no] ra t i on al tri erof fa ctcoul d h ave f ou nd [s uch a subst ant i al st ep] beyond a r ea sonabl e dou bt . ” J a c k s o n v . V ir g in ia , 443 U . S . 307, 319 ( 1979) . T o c ons t i tut e as ubs t a nt i a l s t e p, “th e d e f e n d a n t’s a c tio n s m u s t g o b e y o n d m e r e p r e p a r a tio n , a n d m u s t c o rr o b o r a te strong l y the fi rm ness of the defendant ’ s c ri m i nal i nt ent . ” U ni te d State s v . H

of us , 598 F . 3d 1171, 1174 ( 9th C i r . 2010) ( quot i ng U ni te d State s v . N

e l s on , 66 F . 3d 1 0 3 6 , 1 0 4 2 ( 9 th C ir . 1 9 9 5 ) ) . T h e in te rn e t c h a ts , e m a ils e x c h a n g e s a n d p h o n e c a lls be tw e e n R os s a nd hi s a l l e ge d vi c t i m , nott o m e nt i on hi s tr a ve l t o al oc a t i on tha the th o u g h t w a s h e rh o m e , p r o v id e d th e ju ry w ith a m p le e v id e n c e f r o m w h ic h to c o n c lu d e th a t h e to o ks u c h as te p . See G oet zke , 494 F . 3d a t1237. R o s s ’s o th e rth r e e a r g u m e n ts c o n c e rn th e d e f e n s e o f e n tr ap m e n t. T o p r e v a il on a n e ntr apm e ntde f

e ns e , ade f

e nda ntm us tboth ha ve be e n i nduc e d by the g o v e rn m e n t to c o m m it th e c r im e a n d h a v e la c k e d th e p r e d is p o s itio n to d o s o . See U ni te d State s v . P oe hlm an , 21 7 F . 3d 69 2, 69 8 (9th C i r. 20 00 ). “ A n i m prop er- 3-

i n d u c e m e n tg o e s b e y o n dp r o v i d i n g a n o r d i n a ry o p p o r tu n i ty t o c o m m i tac r i m e . An i n d u cem en tco n si st s o f an o p p o rtu n i ty plus s om e thi ng e l s e — typi c a l l y , e xc e s s i ve pr e s s ur e by the gove rnm e ntupon the de f e nda ntorthe gove rnm e nt ’ s t a ki ng advant age of an al t ernat i ve, no n-cr i m i nal type of m ot i ve. ” I d. at7 0 1 (ci t at i o n s, a lte r a tio n s , a n d in te rn a l q u o ta tio n m a rk s o m itte d ) . G o v e rn m e n t a g e n ts s im p ly pr e s e nt e d R os s w i th a n oppor tuni ty— ac ur i ous thi r t e e n y e a rol d gi r l r e pul s e d by nei ther R oss’ s a ge no r hi s t as t e i n g raph i c porno graphy. T hey di d n othi ng that coul d b e c at egori ze d as pre ss ure, sol i ci t at i on , or al t er i ng “ the no rm al bal ance betw ee n ri sks a nd re w ar ds fr om com m i ss i on of the cr i m e. ” I d. a t 7 0 2 - 0 3 . A c c o r d in g ly , th e r e w a s n o in d u c e m e n t. R os s ’ s s e c ond, thi r d a nd f our th c ont e nt i ons a l l f

a i l be c aus e of

the abs e nc e of i n d u c e m e n t . R o s s ’ s s e c o n d c o n t e n t i o n i s th a th e wa s e n tr ap p e d a s am a tt e ro f l a w, bu tw i tho uti nd ucem entthere ca n b e no entrapm ent . H i s thi rd cont ent i on i s that th e d is tr ic t c o u r t g a v e a n e rr o n e o u s ju ry in s tru c tio n a s to th e f a c to r s to b e u s e d to de t e rm i ne pr e di s pos i t i on. B e c aus e the r e w a s no i nduc e m e nt , R os s ’ s pr e di s pos i t i on w a s o f n o m o m e n t a n d th e in s tru c tio n , e rr o n e o u s o rn o t, d id n o t p r e ju d ic e h im . F i na l l y , R os s c ont e nds tha tthe di s tr i c tc our te rr e d by f a i l i ng t o gi ve al i m i t i ng i n s tru c t i o n b a rr i n g th e j u ry f r o m c o n s i d e r i n g s t o r i e s d o w n l o a d e d b yRo s s s o me m onths a f

t e rhi s a rr e s tw he n de t e rm i ni ng hi s pr e di s pos i t i on. A ga i n the r e w a s no- 4-

pr e j udi c e be c aus e the r e w a s no i nduc e m e nta nd he nc e no e ntr apm e nt , r e ga r dl e s s of R os s ’ s pr e di s pos i t i on.

AF F I RME D.